The protective role of valuing cultural activities on cannabis use in reserve-Dwelling First Nation youth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cannabis legalization and use across North America disproportionately negatively affects North American Indigenous (NAI) youth. Cultural activities may function as an alternative reinforcer to protect against substance use and promote engagement in substance-free activities. The present study explored the role of valuing cultural activities on positive cannabis expectancies and past-month cannabis use. This was a secondary data analysis of data from one NAI adolescent population reporting any past-month cannabis use. 106 NAI adolescents (50% female) from a Canadian reserve community completed surveys in spring 2017. The Institutional Review Board, tribal chief, and council approved this study and informed consent, assent, and parental permission were obtained from participants. Linear regression results revealed significant main effects of positive cannabis expectancies (b = 2.926, SE = 1.198, p = .017, 95%CI[0.542, 5.309]) and valuing cultural activities (b= −0.471,SE = 0.234, p=.048, 95%CI[−0.937, −0.005]) on cannabis use, but no significant interaction between cannabis expectancies and valuing cultural activities. Previous research found valuing cultural activities significantly moderates the relationship between positive alcohol expectancies and alcohol use. Divergent findings may relate to the different historical significance of alcohol versus cannabis. Alcohol was used as a method to colonize NAIs. Thus, our non-significant interaction may result from cannabis not holding the same historical significance in comparison to alcohol for First Nation people, although this is only a hypothesis and should be confirmed with a follow up study. Despite this, calls from Indigenous communities emphasize the need for strength-based approaches and our results indicate that valuing culture is still significantly related to reduced cannabis use, independent of cannabis expectancies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".